John had been a wreck who couldn't live another day without drinking. Whenever I'd run into him, a bottle had been...

[EngLearner]

I made up the following.

John had been a wreck who couldn't live another day without drinking. Whenever I'd run into him, a bottle had been within arm's reach, his clothes carrying the stale scent of whiskey and neglect. He had borrowed money from friends, relatives, and strangers alike, but he had never repaid any of it. He had alienated nearly everyone who had tried to help him. His health had deteriorated, his confidence had vanished, and whatever ambitions he had once possessed had seemed to disappear beneath years of self-destruction. Now all of that was no longer the case: in front of me stood a man wearing an expensive suit. He had a lot of power and a lot of money. For a moment, I wondered if I had mistaken him for someone else. He caught me staring and smiled. The smile was familiar, but everything else seemed different. His posture was straight, his movements deliberate, and there was a confidence about him that the old John had never possessed.

The past perfect can be used in past-tense narratives to give background and context to the main event. In this example, the red part gives background and context to the blue part.

Is the past perfect in the red part used correctly or is it overused?

 

[emsr2d2]

I made up the following.

John had been a wreck who couldn't live another day without drinking. Whenever I'd run into him, a bottle had been would be within arm's reach, his clothes carrying the stale scent of whiskey and neglect. He had borrowed money from friends, relatives, and strangers alike, but he had never repaid any of it. He had alienated nearly everyone who had tried to help him. His health had deteriorated, his confidence had vanished, and whatever ambitions he had once possessed had seemed to disappear beneath years of self-destruction.

I'd make the two changes above. (In case the second is hard to spot, I'd write "... and strangers alike, but never repaid any of it".

 

[jutfrank]

The past perfect can be used in past-tense narratives to give background and context to the main event. In this example, the red part gives background and context to the blue part.

That's right. Good.

Is the past perfect in the red part used correctly or is it overused?

Yes, it's used correctly. Is it overused? What do you mean? Wasn't that precisely your intention by writing a context with eleven past perfect verb phrases?

 

[EngLearner]

Is it overused? What do you mean?

A native English speaker said: "You have overused the past perfect here. We would revert to the simple past when possible."

He suggested this version instead (his corrections are in red):

John had been a wreck who couldn't live another day without drinking. Whenever I'd run = I would run into him, a bottle was within arm's reach, his clothes carrying the stale scent of whiskey and neglect. He borrowed money from friends, relatives, and strangers alike, but he never repaid any of it. He had alienated nearly everyone who had tried to help him. Friends had stopped answering his calls, employers had lost patience with him, and landlords had threatened to throw him out more than once. His health had deteriorated, his confidence had vanished, and whatever ambitions he had once possessed seemed to have disappeared beneath years of self-destruction.

Wasn't that precisely your intention by writing a context with eleven past perfect verb phrases?

Yes, it was.

I'm asking this question to see whether my version with 11 past perfects is acceptable and whether using the simple past (and other simpler verb forms such as "I would run") instead is a stylistic choice rather than a necessity.

 

[emsr2d2]

Whenever I'd run = I would run into him,

I'm asking this question to see whether my version with 11 past perfects is acceptable and whether using the simple past (and other simpler verb forms such as "I would run") instead is a stylistic choice rather than a necessity.

I assumed "I'd run" was a contraction of "I would run" in the first place. Did you mean for it to be a contraction of "I had run"?

 

[EngLearner]

Did you mean for it to be a contraction of "I had run"?

Yes.

 

[emsr2d2]

I assumed "I'd run" was a contraction of "I would run" in the first place. Did you mean for it to be a contraction of "I had run"?

Yes.

In that case, I think that was an unnecessary use of the past perfect. I took it to mean "I would run" as you were expressing a habitual action, indicated by "Whenever". I'd use one of these:

Whenever I'd (I would) run into him, a bottle would be within arm's reach ...
Whenever I ran into him, a bottle was within arm's reach ...

 

[jutfrank]

I'm asking this question to see whether my version with 11 past perfects is acceptable

I don't know what you mean by 'acceptable'. Acceptable to who?

It's not a real text, EngLearner. It was made up by you as an example of something. No one needs to accept it.

and whether using the simple past (and other simpler verb forms such as "I would run") instead is a stylistic choice rather than a necessity.

It's the writer's/speaker's decision to switch tenses and aspects to suit the narrative.

 

[EngLearner]

I don't know what you mean by 'acceptable'. Acceptable to who?

Acceptable to native English speakers.

 

[jutfrank]

Is it acceptable to native English speakers to use the past perfect to give background and context to a narrative event? Yes, of course it is. I would hope that's clear by now.

A native English speaker said: "You have overused the past perfect here.

By using the word 'overused', I imagine this native speaker was commenting on your text as a styistic piece of writing rather than on the use of the past perfect. No, it's not likely that you'll see a paragraph with eleven verb phrases in very close succession all giving background to a narrative event. I think you know this, which is why you deliberately tried to force it, and that was the point of your question. You weren't really trying to make it sound good.

"We would revert to the simple past when possible."

That's not right.

Remember that the choice to switch tense or aspect is a literary choice, not a grammatical one. The writer presents events in the way he wants to. If you use eleven past perfect phrases all in one short paragraph, it's not a question of acceptability, but a question of how well it works for the narrative.

 

[SoothingDave]

John had been a wreck who couldn't live another day without drinking.

How many days had he lived without drinking? It sounds to me like he drinks every day.

So this should say "...who couldn't live a day without drinking"

 

[EngLearner]

How many days had he lived without drinking? It sounds to me like he drinks every day.

He had drunk every day.

I thought my wording meant exactly that.

 

[SoothingDave]

Your wording meant that there had been at least one day where he did not drink and he could not live another day like that.

For there to be an "other" day, there must first be a day. You can't have another sandwich if you didn't already have at least one.

 

[jutfrank]

The phrase is ambiguous:

couldn't live another day without drinking
= couldn't endure another day unless he had a drink


couldn't live another day without drinking
= couldn't endure another alcohol-free day

Yes, the latter implies there has already been at least one alcohol-free day.